April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona’s Economy
Economic and business research center

Smooth Ride or Bumps Ahead? Arizona’s Economy
Heads into Uncertain Global Terrain
By George W. Hammond, Ph.D., EBR Director and Research Professor
positive for Arizona, but they are having
an adverse impact on oil producing states,
for instance Texas and Mexico. The major
increases in the value of the U.S. dollar
during the past year and a half will impact
U.S. exporters of goods and services,
including exporters in Arizona. Further,
possible monetary policy mistakes remain
a concern as we look to the future,
as does growth of our major trading
partners.

T

he economic scorecard for 2015
shows the state economy adding jobs,
residents, and income. Labor market
performance improved, with 61,600 net
new jobs and an unemployment rate of
6.1% according to the preliminary data.
Arizona also added just over 91,000 new
residents last year, with positive net
migration. Personal income is expected to
rise by 4.9%, slightly faster than in 2014.
The Phoenix metropolitan statistical area
(MSA) continued to drive state growth,
but the Tucson MSA managed to grind
out only slow gains. Overall, 2015 was a
solid but not great year.
Look for modest improvements in job,
population, and income growth in 2016,
but keep an eye on national/global growth
risks as well. Recent stock market declines,
if sustained, may weigh a bit on consumer
spending, particularly for luxury goods.
Low oil and gasoline prices are a net
In this issue

Arizona also faces risks related to U.S.
residential mobility, which has been slow
to recover from the Great Recession. If
mobility does not increase as expected,
it will dampen state population gains and
the housing recovery.

Arizona Recent
Developments
In December, the Arizona Department
of Administration released population
estimates for the state, counties, and
cities for 2015. The data put the state’s
population at 6,758,251 on July 1, which
was up by 91,010, or 1.4%, from 2014.
That was a slight improvement over
growth in 2014 (at 1.3%) but it was also
less than one half of our average growth
rate during the 30 years before the Great
Recession (3.2% per year)
As Exhibit 1 shows, both the Phoenix
and Tucson metropolitan statistical
areas (MSAs) added residents last year.

Exhibit 1: Arizona’s Population Is Still Rising at a Modest Pace

Annual Growth Rate
percent

Arizona, Phoenix MSA, Tucson MSA

4
3

Arizona
Phoenix MSA
Tucson MSA

2
1
0

00

02

Smooth Ride or Bumps Ahead? Arizona’s Economy Heads
into Uncertain Global Terrain First Quarter 2016
Forecast Update. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Nogales, Arizona: Still the Main Gateway for Fresh Produce
from Mexico?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Image of Businessman and Globe courtesy of Shutterstock

March 1, 2016

04

06

08

10

12

14

Five-City Study on Poverty Reduction Offers
Lessons for Tucson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Forecast Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Arizona Economic Indicators: State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Arizona Economic Indicators: Metro Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Arizona Economic Indicators: Counties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

-1

Arizona’s Economy

Consumer

Exhibit 2: Both Natural Increase and Net Migration Contributed to
Arizona’s Population Gains
Arizona’s Population: Components of Change

spending is expected

July 1, 2014 - July 1, 2015 (000s)

to remain a solid
contributor to growth
during the forecast,

Arizona

Phoenix MSA

Tucson MSA

6,667

4,405

1,007

33.9

29.0

2.6

87

60

12

53

31

9

57

49

0

Population, 2015
6,758.3
*Total may not sum due to rounding.

4,482.9

1,009.4

Population, 2014
plus:
Natural Increase

supported by income

equals:
Births

and job gains. Auto and

minus:

light truck sales remain
a bright spot.

Deaths
plus:
Net Migration
equals:

The Phoenix MSA (Maricopa and Pinal
counties) added 78,018 residents last
year, which translated into a rate of 1.8%
and accounted for 85.7% of statewide
population gains. The data put population
in Phoenix at 4,482,906. The Tucson MSA
(Pima County) also added residents last
year, but at a far slower pace than the
state or Phoenix. The latest estimates put
Tucson’s population at 1,009,371 in 2015, up
2,209 or 0.2%.
Arizona’s population gains last year were
driven both by natural increase and net
migration. Natural increase is the difference
between births and deaths. Net migration
is the difference between in-migration and
out-migration during the year. As Exhibit 2
shows, positive net migration contributed
more to Arizona’s population increase than
did natural increase. Of the roughly 91,000
increase during the year, 33,900 were
due to the difference between births and
deaths. Net migration contributed more,
with an estimated 57,100 more people
moving in than moving out.
Arizona continues to generate solid job
gains. In 2015, the state added 61,600
jobs, up from 49,100 in 2014. Job gains
in 2015 translated into a growth rate of
2.4%, up from 1.9% in 2014. While job

2

growth in the state beat the national
average last year (of 2.1%) our pace fell
below the average established during the
1977-2007 period, which was 4.1% per year.
The Phoenix MSA added 54,500 jobs last
year, which translated into a rate of 2.9%.
That was faster than the pace set in 2014,
of 2.4%. Job gains in Tucson continued
at a slow pace last year, with an increase
of 1,500 (0.4%). Keep in mind that all of
the employment data referenced here is
based on EBRC’s internal benchmark of the
raw data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics.

Arizona Outlook
The U.S. economy continues to grow at a
modest pace, with real GDP rising by 2.4%
in 2015. That was the same pace posted in
2014. The IHS Economics’ forecast calls for
gains to accelerate modestly during the
next two years, with real GDP growth rising
to 2.7% next year and 2.9% in 2017. This is
driven by less drag from the inventory cycle,
federal spending, and energy-sector capital
spending. In addition, the housing sector is
expected to continue to gain momentum.
Consumer spending is expected to remain
a solid contributor to growth during the
forecast, supported by income and job

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Exhibit 3: Arizona Outlook Summary
Actual*

Overall, the

Forecast

2015*

2016

2017

2018

the state to gain

Growth Rate
Nonfarm Jobs

2.4

2.7

2.8

2.9

Personal Income

4.9

5.2

5.6

6

Retail Sales Less Food

9.7

4.8

5.6

5.2

Population

1.4

1.6

1.8

1.8

6.1

5.4

5.1

5

32,499

37,620

42,700

45,699

Level

momentum during
the next three years. If
the national economy
continues to expand, the

Unempl. Rate
Housing Permits

forecast calls for

for stronger growth.

* Retail sales and personal income data are forecast.

gains. Auto and light truck sales remain a
bright spot.
Net exports are expected to be a small drag
on the U.S. economy during the next three
years, as a stronger dollar reduces export
competitiveness and increases imports.
With world interest rates and growth
becoming more synchronized during the
next three years, the dollar is forecast to
gradually retreat.
The outlook for interest rates calls for the
Federal Reserve to gradually push rates
up during the next four years. Overall, the
interest rate outlook calls for the 10-year
Treasury note yield to rise from 2.14% on
average in 2015 to 3.82% by 2019.

state is well positioned

Overall, if the national economy continues
to expand, the state is well positioned for
stronger growth. However, that growth is
expected to remain well below long-run
historical averages.
The Phoenix MSA is forecast to continue
to drive state gains, with job growth rising
from 2.9% in 2015 to 3.2% by 2018. That
far outpaces growth in the Tucson MSA,
where job gains accelerate from 0.4% in
2015 to 1.5% by 2018.

Need to know more?
Contact George Hammond about the
benefits of becoming a Forecasting Project
sponsor!

Exhibit 3 summarizes the outlook for
Arizona in the near term. Overall, the
forecast calls for the state to gain
momentum during the next three years.
Job growth is forecast to accelerate from
2.4% in 2015 to 2.9% by 2018. Population
and income gains show a similar pattern.

>>Save the Date!
Mark your calendar! Our 2016 edition of Breakfast with the Economists is scheduled for 7:00 AM on
Wednesday, June 1st, 2016, at the Westin La Paloma Resort and Spa in Tucson. Registration opens in April.
This year EBRC Director and Research Professor George W. Hammond, Ph.D., will be joined by Ross DeVol,
Chief Research Officer at the Milken Institute. Registration coming in April.

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

3

Arizona’s Economy

Nogales, Arizona: Still the Main Gateway for
Fresh Produce from Mexico?
By Vera Pavlakovich-Kochi

U

In 2015 Nogales’

ntil last December, when 2015 annual
totals for the importation of fresh
produce were computed, Arizona’s
Nogales port of entry held a century-old
position as the major entry point for fresh
produce from Mexico to the U.S. According
to the U.S. Census, Nogales, for the first
time in its long history of importation of
Sonora and Sinaloa-grown fresh produce,
has lost its leading position among all
southern border ports of entry. Measured in
the dollar value of imported fresh produce,
in 2015 Nogales was overtaken by Hidalgo,
Texas, and dropped to second place (Figure
1).

share fell to an all-time
low of 25.5 percent,
surpassing the previous
low of 38.8 percent in
2010, and significantly
below its long-held
high of 60 percent in the
1980s and 1990s. What
has happened?

More dramatically, in 2015 Nogales’ share
fell to an all-time low of 25.5 percent,
surpassing the previous low of 38.8 percent
in 2010, and significantly below its longheld high of 60 percent in the 1980s and
1990s. What has happened?
For some time now, concerned voices have
been raised by the Nogales fresh produce
industry, economic developers, and elected
officials who have drawn attention to Texas
border ports of entry as they facilitate
rapidly increasing volumes of Mexican fresh

produce. These voices reflect a widespread
perception that Texas border ports are
successfully competing with (or against)
Nogales. A major reason, as is widely
believed, has been that in comparison with
Arizona, Texas border ports of entry are
better equipped and provide more efficient
and time-saving inspection, and thus reduce
the cost of border crossings. It has been
frequently lamented that delegations from
Texas are coming to Nogales and Rio Rico to
lure Arizona-based shippers and distributors
into their courts by offering new storage
facilities and (possibly) other business perks.
There is also a real and perceived impact of
the newly completed Mazatlan-Durango
highway, which after being connected to
the existing highway system in Mexico,
created the shortest distance from Sinaloa
to the U.S. border: about 650 miles to
Reynosa/Hidalgo compared to about 720
miles to Nogales.
While each of these facts and perceptions
plays a role in Nogales’ declining share of
total imports of Mexican fresh produce, is
there a reasonable ground for a panic?

Figure 1:
$millions

Import of Mexican Fresh Produce Through the Top Three Ports
2010-2015

3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000

Nogales
Hidlago, Texas
Laredo, Texas

500
0
2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Source: AZMEX.eller.arizona.edu based on U.S. Census via USA Trade Online

4

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

2015

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Difference Between the
Value and Relative Share of
Imported Fresh Produce
There is a profound difference between
the various methods applied to measure
imports, which of course also depends on
the purpose of the particular measurement.
The percentage share method is useful
to describe a port’s position relative to
all other border ports of entry, and if
monitored over time, shows if the port’s
position improved (higher share) or declined
(lower share). Accordingly, achievement
of higher shares can be interpreted as a
rise in the port’s competitiveness relative
to other ports, while its declining share
is not necessarily a result of declining
volumes or values of imports. Alternatively,
lower shares simply mean that imports are
increasing more rapidly through other ports
resulting in a smaller share of an expanded
pie.
The value of imported fresh produce
through Nogales in the last six years varied
between $2.5 billion in 2010 and $2.6
billion in 2015 (Figure 2).
The data do not indicate any drastic
interruption of the established pattern;
rather, the annual variations in dollar
value of imported fresh produce might
be primarily due to fluctuations in market

prices resulting from unfavorable weather
conditions, such as more or less rain than
usual or even frost.

Vegetables vs. Fruits
The fresh produce category is comprised of
two major commodity groups: vegetables
(more specifically, “Edible vegetables &
certain roots & tubers”) and fruits and nuts
(more specifically, “Edible fruit & nuts;
citrus fruit or melon peel”). Disaggregating
the data into these two categories uncovers
profound differences between the three
leading ports of entry (Figure 3).
Vegetables comprise about two thirds of
the total value of imported fresh produce
through Nogales. In contrast, fruits
comprise about two thirds of the total value
of imported fresh produce through Hidalgo.
Laredo’s imports are almost equally divided
between vegetables and fruits. In both
Texas’ ports, Hidalgo and Laredo, the value
of imported fruits has increased since 2010.
In the case of Nogales, the vegetables-fruits
ratio remained unchanged.

First, Nogales is still
the leading port of entry
for Mexican-grown
vegetables. Second, the
increase in imported
fresh produce through
Texas ports of entry is
primarily a result of
increasing imports of
Mexican-grown fruits.

Figure 4 sheds additional light on two
important facts. First, Nogales is still
the leading port of entry for Mexicangrown vegetables. Second, the increase in
imported fresh produce through Texas ports
of entry is primarily a result of increasing
imports of Mexican-grown fruits.

Figure 2:
$millions

Value of U.S. Imports of Fresh Produce from Mexico Through Nogales
2010-2015

3,000
Nogales

2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Source: AZMEX.eller.arizona.edu based on U.S. Census via USA Trade Online

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

5

Arizona’s Economy

Figure 3:

Composition of Fresh Produce Imports

percent

2015

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20

Fruits
Vegetables

10
0
Nogales, AZ

Hidalgo, TX

Laredo, TX

Source: AZMEX.eller.arizona.edu based on U.S. Census via USA Trade Online

Rate of Change
Whereas the next chart (Figure 5) clearly
establishes Nogales as the leading port
of entry for Mexican-grown vegetables,
it also shows that imports of vegetables
through Hidalgo and Laredo have increased
substantially since 2010. This uneven rate of
growth in the imported value of vegetables
between Nogales and the two Texas border
ports of entry is even more pronounced
when expressed as an index number with
2010 as the baseline (Figure 6).

Imports of vegetables through Nogales
port of entry, as already noticed, have
kept more or less steady during the last six
years. In contrast, imports of vegetables
doubled through Laredo, following closely
the similar growth rate through Hidalgo.

Conclusions
So far, the data suggest that the changing
relative position of the Nogales port of
entry in comparison with Texas border ports
of entry is not because of shipments being
diverted to Hidalgo and Laredo, or at least

Figure 4:
$millions

Mexican Fresh Produce Imports by Type and Value
2015

2,500

Fruits
Vegetables

2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Nogales, AZ

Hidalgo, TX

Source: AZMEX.eller.arizona.edu based on U.S. Census via USA Trade Online

6

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

Laredo, TX

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Figure 5:

Mexican Vegetable Imports Through the Top Three Ports

$millions

2010-2015

2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600

Nogales
Hidlago, Texas
Laredo, Texas

400
200
0
2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Source: AZMEX.eller.arizona.edu based on U.S. Census via USA Trade Online

this does not appear to be the primary
reason. Rather, a number of other factors
might be at play.
New agricultural areas for exporting fresh
produce to U.S. markets were more recently
developed in central and south Mexican
states, such as Nayarit, Jalisco, Michoacán,
Guerrero, and México. These regions export
primarily through Texas border ports of
entry not only because of a shorter distance
to the border, but also because a lot of
these new growers and importers are Texas
and Canadian companies. It is said that
Figure 6:

Texas growers “moved their gardens south
of Rio Grande” for a combination of reasons
such as lower production costs and growing
demand in U.S. and Canada markets.
As for Nogales’ shippers/distributors being
lured to Hidalgo or Laredo, the fact is that
a number of them have established their
offices in Texas. The anecdotal information
suggests that at least for some of them this
is a strategic move to offset the impacts
of pronounced seasonality in the SinaloaSonora fresh produce production and tap
into the year-round production in central
and south Mexican agricultural regions.

Mexican Vegetable Import Growth

index

index: 2010 =100

250
200
150
100

Nogales
Hidlago, Texas
Laredo, Texas

50
0
2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

Source: AZMEX.eller.arizona.edu based on U.S. Census via USA Trade Online

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

7

Arizona’s Economy

But all of this needs little bit more data
mining outside of official import/export
statistics. One thing is sure: importation of
fresh produce from Mexico is not as it used
to be. Time will only tell whether the newly

completed Mazatlan-Durango highway
presents real competition to the Nogales
border port of entry or simply opens up
additional opportunities for Sinaloa growers
to reach new U.S. and Canadian markets.

Time will only tell whether the newly completed Mazatlan-Durango
highway presents real competition to the Nogales border port of entry or
simply opens up additional opportunities for Sinaloa growers to reach new
U.S. and Canadian markets.

Five-City Study on Poverty Reduction Offers
Lessons for Tucson
Diversity in
representation of
interests, resources,
and strategies was
universally seen
as essential for
determining what
regionally-specific
antipoverty strategies
should be developed and
prioritized.

A new study released by the Making Action
Possible Dashboard for Southern Arizona
(MAP Dashboard) examines five cities’
efforts to address regional poverty, with
useful lessons for Tucson’s own poverty
reduction initiatives.
The paper, “A Multi-City Comparison
of Poverty Reduction Strategies: What
Can Tucson Learn from Other Cities?”
identifies the strategies and organizational
partners used by other cities. In each case,
researchers studied the effectiveness of
community stakeholders’ collaborative
action to reduce unemployment,
homelessness and hunger.
The study builds on research collected
for Mayor Jonathan Rothschild’s Poverty
Commission (2012 – 2014) and was
conducted by Brian Mayer, Ph.D., an
associate professor in the University of
Arizona College of Social and Behavior
Sciences School of Sociology, and Julie
Grace Smith, M.S., a doctoral candidate in
the School of Sociology.
From 40 cities with anti-poverty initiatives,
five cities/counties were selected as case
studies based on similarities to Tucson
“in terms of population, official poverty
rate, racial/ethnic diversity, government
structure, and economic makeup
(unemployment rate and primary industrial
sectors).” Subject cities included Rochester,
NY; Kalamazoo, MI; Norfolk, VA; Springfield,
MO; and Nashville, TN.

8

The paper studies each city in detail, from
the precipitating causes and formation
of new anti-poverty initiatives, the
stakeholders involved and the strategies
used. In all five cases, “cities adopted a
collaborative model that included both
municipal representatives, the local
nonprofit community, and to a slightly
lesser degree the for-profit private sector.”
A key finding noted by Mayer and Smith
is the importance of inclusiveness in the
collaborative process. The legitimacy of
resultant proposals hinged largely on
the inclusion of diverse voices, including
elected officials, nonprofit stakeholders and
business leaders; “diversity in representation
of interests, resources, and strategies was
universally seen as essential for determining
what regionally-specific antipoverty
strategies should be developed and
prioritized.” The private sector, in particular,
was noted as “essential to the long-term
success of these antipoverty initiatives,”
due to its potential financial support of
key programs and its influence on strategy
development.
When comparing Tucson to the five
cities studied, the study authors found
that Tucson’s city, nonprofit and private
sector stakeholders have worked together
on poverty reduction strategies in a
fashion similar to the subject cities. They
note, however, that longer-term success
resulting in policy implementation and

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

action on strategies developed through the
collaborative model will require substantial
commitment from participants and strong
leadership from elected officials.
“This research provides an empirical
foundation for what we know anecdotally
to be true: Moving the needle on poverty
and other economic issues in Tucson and
Southern Arizona requires the collaboration
of our elected officials, the business
community and nonprofit and civic leaders,”
said [Brain Mayer]. “The MAP Dashboard
continues to be a powerful platform for
presenting new information, like this
research from the University of Arizona,
and starting great conversations about how
we, as a community, can work together to
measurably improve quality of life for all
Southern Arizonans,” said [Jennifer Pullen].

About MAP DASHBOARD
MAP – Making Action Possible for
Southern Arizona, and referred to as the
MAP Dashboard, is a partnership with
the University of Arizona Eller College,
the Community Foundation for Southern
Arizona (CFSA), and the Southern
Arizona Leadership Council (SALC). The
MAP Dashboard Project was created to
measurably improve Southern Arizona
through data-driven collective civic action
and education. University of Arizona’s Eller
Economic and Business Research Center has
built the MAP Dashboard and will keep the
information up to date. The MAP Dashboard
Project provides our region’s first common
set of indicators in a single, easy-to-access
source of reliable information.

The full paper, “A Multi-City Comparison
of Poverty Reduction Strategies: What
Can Tucson Learn from Other Cities?” is
published on the MAP Dashboard website:
www.mapazdashboard.arizona.edu

Moving the needle on poverty and other economic issues in Tucson
and Southern Arizona requires the collaboration of our elected officials, the
business community and nonprofit and civic leaders.

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

9

Arizona’s Economy

>>Keeping Current
Arizona’s Economy is published quarterly by the Economic and Business Research Center in the Eller College of
Management. For continuous updates of Arizona’s economic indicators, check out our website’s Indicators page:
http://azeconomy.eller.arizona.edu/az_indicators/
There you can browse indicators by geography or topic and graph each series by clicking on the series title.

>>Subscribe
If you wish to be notified each quarter when a new issue of Arizona’s Economy is posted, email:
EBRPublications@eller.arizona.edu
Please put “subscribe” in the header line and include your name and contact information in your email. We do not
share our mailing list.

Follow the Economic and Business Research Center on
Twitter @Eller_EBRC and Facebook Eller.EBRC.
Economic data for Arizona at your fingertips - download the free AZ
Economy App today!
Search on “Arizona’s Economy” in the iTunes App Store or on Google Play and download the Arizona’s
Economy mobile app 2.0 for your iphone, ipad, or android phone today.

10

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Forecast Tables
Arizona
Personal Income ($ mil)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Retail Sales ($mil)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Population (000s), July 1st estimates
  % Chg from Year Ago
Residential Building Permits (units)
  % Chg from Year Ago

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale MSA
Personal Income ($ mil)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Retail Sales ($ mil)
  % Chg from Prior
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Population (000s), July 1st estimates
  % Chg from Year Ago

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

255,093

267,465

281,408

297,245

315,046

333,469

4.7%

4.9%

5.2%

5.6%

6.0%

5.8%

88,506

93,134

96,555

102,408

108,239

113,837

3.5%

5.2%

3.7%

6.1%

5.7%

5.2%

2,569.5
1.9%
0.0

2,631.1
2.4%
0.0

2,702.2
2.7%
0.0

2,777.9
2.8%
0.0

2,858.1
2.9%
0.0

2,934.5
2.7%
0.0

1.3%

1.4%

1.6%

1.8%

1.8%

1.8%

26,997

32,499

37,620

42,700

45,699

47,087

7.1%

20.4%

15.8%

13.5%

7.0%

3.0%

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

178,871

188,708

199,111

211,678

225,553

240,075

5.1%

5.5%

5.5%

6.3%

6.6%

6.4%

61,969

65,022

68,032

72,349

77,088

81,734

3.9%

4.9%

4.6%

6.3%

6.6%

6.0%

1,854.4

1,909.0

1,966.0

2,029.5

2,095.2

2,157.6

2.4%

2.9%

3.0%

3.2%

3.2%

3.0%

4,404.9

4,482.9

4,568.2

4,663.9

4,766.3

4,872.8

1.5%

1.8%

1.9%

2.1%

2.2%

2.2%

20,341

24,089

28,621

32,212

34,567

35,944

  % Chg from Prior

8.6%

18.4%

18.8%

12.5%

7.3%

4.0%

Tucson MSA

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Personal Income ($ mil)

37,199

38,614

40,085

41,844

43,851

45,968

  % Chg from Year Ago

4.0%

3.8%

3.8%

4.4%

4.8%

4.8%

Residential Building Permits (units)

Retail Sales ($ mil)

12,518

12,895

13,254

13,869

14,436

15,017

  % Chg from Year Ago

1.6%

3.0%

2.8%

4.6%

4.1%

4.0%

Total Nonfarm Employment (000s)

365.0

366.5

369.9

375.0

380.8

386.9

  % Chg from Year Ago

0.5%

0.4%

0.9%

1.4%

1.5%

1.6%

1,007.2

1,009.4

1,015.8

1,025.0

1,035.6

1,048.0

1.1%

0.2%

0.6%

0.9%

1.0%

1.2%

Population (000s), July 1st estimates
  % Chg from Year Ago
Residential Permits (units)

3,250

3,685

3,987

4,330

4,774

4,933

  % Chg from Year Ago

-6.9%

13.4%

8.2%

8.6%

10.3%

3.3%

>>Need More?
Do you need more detailed and comprehensive forecast data and analysis? Learn about the benefits of becoming a
Forecasting Project sponsor. Forecasting Project sponsorship allows your company or organization to access an in-depth
menu of economic forecasting and consulting services, as well as, quarterly forecast update meetings. Contact George
Hammond at ghammond@eller.arizona.edu or call 520.626.1679
The Forecasting Project is a community-sponsored research unit within the Economic and Business Research Center
producing quarterly economic forecasts for Arizona and its metro areas. These forecasts are recognized as among the
most accurate in the Western states.

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

11

Arizona’s Economy

Arizona Economic Indicators
Arizona - Labor Force and Employment, SA

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Jan 2016

Persons (000s, seasonally adjusted), Local Area Unemployment Statistics, BLS
Civilian Labor Force
  % Chg from Year Ago
Employment
Unemployment
Unemployment Rate

3,151.3

3,157.2

3,162.5

3,167.3

3,187.5

1.6%

1.5%

1.4%

1.3%

1.8%

2,964.6

2,970.9

2,976.7

2,981.7

3,008.3

186.7

186.2

185.9

185.5

179.2

5.9

5.9

5.9

5.9

5.6

Employees on Nonagricultural Payrolls (000s, seasonally adjusted), Current Employment Statistics, BLS
Total
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Private
  % Chg from Year Ago
Goods Producing
Mining and Logging

2,664.7

2,677.7

2,681.6

2,682.4

2.8%

2.9%

3.2%

3.2%

2.9%

2,240.2

2,257.3

2,268.3

2,273.7

2,279.2

3.4%
299.0

3.6%
299.1

3.9%
303.1

3.9%
302.4

3.8%
305.1

12.5

12.0

11.9

12.0

11.7

Construction

127.9

127.7

131.1

130.1

131.7

Manufacturing

158.6

159.4

160.1

160.3

161.7

121.2

122.0

122.2

122.1

122.3

37.4

37.4

37.9

38.2

39.4

2,350.8

2,365.6

2,374.6

2,379.2

2,377.3

1,941.2

1,958.2

1,965.2

1,971.3

1,974.1

Durable Goods
Non-Durable Goods
Service Providing
Private Service Providing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade

93.9

94.4

94.5

93.7

94.6

325.5

326.9

327.2

326.4

324.9

Transportation and Utilities

91.5

91.7

92.6

93.1

92.8

Information

44.9

46.4

46.6

46.9

47.6

Finance and Insurance

148.3

148.6

148.8

149.9

152.1

Real Estate and Rental and Leasing

48.4

49.7

48.3

48.9

49.5

Professional and Business Services

400.4

404.9

408.7

412.6

412.5

132.8

134.8

134.3

134.8

135.2

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services
Management of Companies and Enterprises
Administrative and Support
Waste Management and Remediation Services
Educational Services
Health Care and Social Assistance
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Accommodation and Food Services
Other Services
Government

31.9

32.2

32.4

32.4

32.2

235.7

237.9

242.0

245.4

245.1

59.8

62.4

62.4

62.1

63.3

339.1

341.0

343.0

343.8

343.9

39.4

39.5

40.2

40.2

40.1

261.5

263.2

264.1

264.2

263.4

88.5

89.5

88.8

89.5

89.4

409.6

407.4

409.4

407.9

403.2

-0.3%

-0.9%

-0.4%

-0.7%

-1.8%

Federal Government

54.8

54.3

54.4

54.4

54.5

State Government

86.0

86.1

88.1

86.1

86.0

268.8

267.0

266.9

267.4

262.7

  % Chg from Year Ago

Local Government

12

2,649.8

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona Economic Indicators
Arizona - Earnings, Sales, Housing, Bankruptcy

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Jan 2016

23.25

23.31

23.48

23.25

23.42

1.9%

2.5%

3.0%

3.4%

2.2%

Average Hourly Earnings by Industry ($, not seasonally adjusted), BLS
Total Private
  % Chg from Year Ago
Construction

23.17

23.01

23.45

23.86

24.35

Manufacturing

24.28

24.57

25.06

24.38

23.96

Financial Activities

26.99

27.22

27.28

27.09

26.71

Professional and Business Services

26.53

26.53

26.23

25.05

25.11

Trade, Transportation, and Utilities

20.69

20.85

21.30

21.57

22.28

Education and Health Services

25.14

25.12

25.29

25.22

25.27

Leisure and Hospitality

14.10

14.15

14.30

14.33

14.31

7,438,832.3

7,558,495.6

7,843,019.1

9,102,391.6

7,411,188.2

5.3%

6.7%

2.4%

2.1%

5.1%

Retail Sales

4,923,634.0

4,916,650.2

5,236,046.1

6,459,006.6

4,744,791.3

Food, EBRC**

1,015,959.4

1,067,984.7

1,086,921.5

1,100,387.8

1,105,036.4

Restaurants & Bars

945,514.8

1,042,833.0

1,034,218.6

1,072,423.2

1,110,430.6

Gasoline, EBRC***

552,722.9

528,668.8

482,597.2

470,574.0

Sales ($000s, accrual), ADOR
Aggregate Retail Sales, EBRC*
  % Chg from Year Ago

Gallons, ADOT

228,021.0

239,433.3

230,356.7

239,844.0

1,064,554.0

919,010.1

672,525.4

718,678.5

772,151.8

197,529.0

192,569.0

194,637.8

178,642.2

204,709.3

80,741.3

91,068.0

95,623.0

105,849.6

159,366.6

Rentals Personal Property

287,908.0

307,546.4

312,511.1

297,479.6

302,669.2

Contracting

798,747.5

855,742.3

738,132.6

852,672.7

649,039.9

Hotel/Motel

Utilities
Communications
Amusements

194,254.7

239,623.4

212,289.5

177,141.2

248,965.7

Mining, Oil, & Gas Production

10,593.1

10,076.2

10,458.0

9,112.1

8,951.6

Mining Severance

56,063.8

66,215.8

38,103.6

51,400.7

38,296.6

Printing

19,334.9

21,441.9

22,377.7

18,843.4

18,917.5

Publishing

7,218.0

9,022.8

8,373.4

7,737.6

11,537.3

474,574.1

523,347.8

442,283.9

483,467.3

440,956.0

2503

2617

2129

2727

2773

  % Chg from Year Ago

34.6%

29.6%

36.2%

-8.7%

62.0%

Single Family Units

1945

1862

1544

1883

1623

23.5%

40.4%

46.9%

27.8%

30.3%

24

16

15

45

42

534

739

570

799

1108

Use Tax
New Housing Units Authorized, Census C-40
Total Units

  % Chg from Year Ago
2-4 Unit Structures
5-plus Unit Structures
Bankruptcy Filings, U.S. Bankruptcy Court - Arizona District
Total
  % Chg from Year Ago
Chapter 7
Chapter 11

1433

1426

1224

1081

846

-1.2%

-5.2%

-1.6%

-12.8%

-13.6%

1190

1175

981

871

668

15

30

32

25

8

Chapter 13
228
221
210
185
170
*EBRC estimates Aggregate Retail Sales by summing Retail Sales (ADOR), Food Sales estimated by EBRC (food is not taxable in Arizona),
Restaurant and Bar Sales (ADOR), and Gasoline Sales estimated by EBRC using number of gallons sold in Arizona (ADOT) and current tax
rate on gasoline (ADOR).
**estimated by EBRC.
***estimated by EBRC using gallons sold (ADOT) and tax rate (ADOR).

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

13

Arizona’s Economy

Arizona Economic Indicators
Arizona - Demographics and Vital Statistics

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

6,438.2

6,498.6

6,581.1

6,667.2

6,758.3

0.6%

0.9%

1.3%

1.3%

1.4%

85.2

85.7

85.0

86.6

84.9

13.2

13.2

12.9

13.0

13.1

47.5

48.5

49.1

51.1

53.0

10.9

34.2

48.5

53.0

66.3

Demographics and Vital Statistics (July 1st Estimates, 000s), ADHS, ADOA & EBRC
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Resident Births, ADHS
Birth Rate
Residents Deaths, ADHS
Net Migration, EBRC

*This population figure is from the Arizona Dept. of Administration, rather than the official Census population count. EBRC feels this
figure is more accurate.
**Birth rate and net migration are both calculated by EBRC using data from the Arizona Dept. of Health Services.

Arizona - Personal Income and Earnings
Per Capita Personal Income ($), EBRC*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Average Earnings per Job ($), BEA**
  % Chg from Year Ago

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

34,240.9

35,867.3

37,114.7

37,024.0

38,260.6

1.3%

4.7%

3.5%

-0.2%

3.3%

46,664

47,943

49,265

49,376

50,661

1.7%

2.7%

2.8%

0.2%

2.6%

219,195.8

230,920.3

241,192.2

243,656.9

255,092.9

Personal Income Derivation ($ millions), BEA***
Total Personal Income
  % Chg from Year Ago

1.4%

5.3%

4.4%

1.0%

4.7%

149,712.1

156,700.8

163,693.4

167,827.3

175,367.2

Less: Contributions for government social insurance

17,129.2

15,873.2

16,423.0

19,165.5

20,056.3

Plus: Adjustment for residence

1,250.9

1,243.5

1,334.5

1,281.9

1,365.2

Earnings by place of work

Equals: Net earnings by place of residence

133,833.8

142,071.1

148,605.0

149,943.7

156,676.1

Plus: Dividends, interest, and rent

37,045.9

40,526.3

44,516.4

44,511.3

46,309.8

Plus: Personal current transfer receipts

48,316.1

48,322.9

48,070.8

49,201.9

52,107.0

Total Wages and salaries

109,289.5

113,662.6

119,041.4

122,598.2

127,815.2

  % Chg from Year Ago

-0.4%

4.0%

4.7%

3.0%

4.3%

Components of Earnings ($ millions), BEA***

Supplements to wages and salaries

25,521.8

26,408.1

26,755.2

27,696.0

28,869.3

Proprietors' income

14,900.8

16,630.0

17,896.8

17,533.1

18,682.7

Farm
Nonfarm

85.0

542.8

318.6

675.6

559.2

14,815.7

16,087.2

17,578.2

16,857.4

18,123.5

*EBRC calulates per capita personal income using total personal income from BEA divided by population estimates from ADOA. ADOA
counts differ from official Census counts, but EBRC considers them more accurate.
**Average earnings per job is total earnings divided by total full-time and part-time employment. Earnings is the sum of three
components of personal income--wages and salaries, supplements to wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income. BEA employment series
for states and local areas comprises estimates of the number of jobs, full-time plus part-time, by place of work. Full-time and part-time
jobs are counted at equal weight. Both employment for wages and salaries and proprietors’ employment are included.
***for detailed definitions, see BEA table SA4 “Personal Income and Employment by Major Component”

14

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona Economic Indicators
Arizona - Travel and Tourism (monthly data)

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Jan 2016

International Border Crossings, Bureau of Transportation Statistics
Pedestrians

3,139,366

  % Chg from Year Ago
Personal Vehicle Passengers

1.2%
10,860,037

  % Chg from Year Ago

6.0%

Bus Passengers*

Border crossing data currently only
available through September 2015.

NA

Trains

829

  % Chg from Year Ago

0.9%

Trucks

Please see AZMEX.eller.ariozna.edu
for full data histories and detail.

455,668

  % Chg from Year Ago

3.4%

Hospitality Employment (000s, not seasonally adjusted), BLS
Leisure and Hospitality
  % Chg from Year Ago
Accommodation

297.1

301.3

303.8

302.4

300.0

4.3%

4.4%

4.3%

3.9%

2.7%

44.9

45.6

44.9

44.5

44.2

3.7%

2.2%

0.5%

-0.2%

0.2%

194,254.7

239,623.4

212,289.5

177,141.2

248,965.7

  % Chg from Year Ago
9.3%
*Bus passenger data is currently under review and unavailable.

9.8%

10.9%

4.2%

-7.8%

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

20,082.5

19,339.1

19,030.6

19,221.3

20,705.7

-3.6%

-3.7%

-1.6%

1.0%

7.7%

17,328.9

16,856.6

16,552.4

16,626.2

18,029.4

-3.4%

-2.7%

-1.8%

0.4%

8.4%

  % Chg from Year Ago
Sales ($000s, accrual), ADOR
Hotel/Motel

Arizona - Travel and Tourism, cont.
Visits (000s) Arizona State and National Parks, NPS & ASPB
Total Arizona
  % Chg from Year Ago
Northern Arizona
  % Chg from Year Ago
Historical

1,296.1

1,327.8

1,147.4

1,070.3

1,114.5

Scenic

6,297.4

6,190.5

6,369.7

6,521.0

6,935.8

Water-based

9,735.4

9,338.3

9,035.3

9,034.9

9,979.1

Southern Arizona

2,753.6

2,482.5

2,478.2

2,595.1

2,676.3

-4.4%

-9.8%

-0.2%

4.7%

3.1%

426.9

438.1

382.2

359.4

384.8

1,939.5

1,726.3

1,729.7

1,869.3

1,903.1

387.2

318.1

366.3

366.4

388.4

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Jan 2016

Feb 2016

237.95

238.30

238.04

238.11

237.71
1.0%

  % Chg from Year Ago
Historical
Scenic
Water-based

Inflation and Prices - United States
U.S. Consumer Price Indices (seasonally adjusted), BLS
All Urban Consumers: All Items
  % Chg from Year Ago
Western States - All Urban Consumers: All items
  % Chg from Year Ago
U.S. Producer Price Index for All Commodities
(seas. adj.), BLS
  % Chg from Year Ago

0.1%

0.4%

0.7%

1.3%

244.34

243.75

243.43

244.60

1.1%

1.5%

1.8%

2.6%

187.70
-7.7%

185.90
-7.5%

183.80
-6.7%

182.50
-5.0%

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

15

Arizona’s Economy

Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs
Note our readers: For the MSAs and counties which follow, EBRC “taxable sales” (accrual basis) only run through May of 2015, hence that
line is currently blank. This is due to a delay in reporting from the Arizona Department of Revenue. We hope to have this remedied in the
next issue.

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale MSA - Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS
Private
Government
Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS
Taxable Sales ($000s, accrual), ADOR*
Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

2,168.7

2,174.4

2,180.5

2,175.1

Jan 2016

5.5

5.2

5.0

4.7

1,920.8

1,952.5

1,979.0

1,984.7

1,946.8

1,680.8

1,709.9

1,734.9

1,745.2

1,715.6

240.0

242.6

244.1

239.5

231.2

24.10

24.16

24.33

24.05

24.15

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

1,855

1,817

1,508

2,114

2,235

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona's "Transaction Privilege Tax," does not include food or gasoline sales.

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale MSA - Annual Data
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal Income ($000), BEA
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income ($), EBRC**
  % Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

4,227,601

4,273,897

4,338,672

4,404,888

4,482,906

0.7%

1.1%

1.5%

1.5%

1.8%

160,086,328

168,757,726

170,239,926

178,871,199

5.8%

5.4%

0.9%

5.1%

37,866.9

39,485.7

39,237.8

40,607.4

0.05

0.04

-0.01

0.03

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

Tucson MSA (Pima County)- Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS
Private
Government
Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

471,490

470,564

472,553

470,703

Jan 2016

5.7

5.5

5.3

5.0

369.6

373.6

379.4

380.9

374.8

290.7

294.0

298.8

300.4

296.0

78.9

79.6

80.6

80.5

78.8

22.15

22.29

22.28

22.15

22.56

Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

288

296

294

279

237

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Tucson MSA (Pima County) - Annual Data
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal income
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income ($), EBRC**
% Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

986,081

990,380

996,046

1,007,162

1,009,371

0.5%

0.4%

0.6%

1.1%

0.2%

34,539,779

35,590,889

35,784,754

37,198,714

4.7%

3.0%

0.5%

4.0%

35,027

35,937

35,927

36,934

4.1%

2.6%

0.0%

2.8%

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

16

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs
Flagstaff MSA (Coconino County) - Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS
Private
Government
Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

74.6

73.8

72.4

71.2

6.4

6.3

6.3

6.6

Jan 2016

67.5

67.6

66.6

65.3

63.7

46.8

46.6

45.8

45.4

44.0

17.8

18.3

18.3

17.4

17.3

18.26

18.21

18.63

18.66

19.06

Taxable Sales: Total ($ Accrual), ADOR*

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

24

214

18

37

11

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona's "Transaction Privilege Tax," does not include food or gasoline sales.

Flagstaff MSA (Coconino County) - Annual Data
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal Income ($000), BEA
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income ($), EBRC**
  % Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

134,162

134,313

135,695

139,372

141,602
1.6%

-0.4%

0.1%

1.0%

2.7%

4,819,660

4,978,754

5,127,921

5,399,899

4.7%

3.3%

3.0%

5.3%

35,924.2

37,068.3

37,790.1

38,744.5

5.1%

3.2%

2.0%

2.5%

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

Lake Havasu City - Kingman MSA (Mohave County) Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS
Private
Government
Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private, $, BLS

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

78.0

77.6

76.7

76.4

Jan 2016

8.4

8.0

7.8

7.6

47.4

47.8

47.5

47.9

47.1

39.7

39.9

39.7

40.0

39.5

7.7

7.9

7.8

7.9

7.6

19.57

18.73

19.64

19.34

19.44

Taxable Sales: Total ($000, accrual), ADOR

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

50

43

44

44

49

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Lake Havasu City-Kingman MSA (Mohave County) Annual Data
Population, July 1st estimate, ADOA
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal Income ($000), BEA
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income, EBRC
  % Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

75,840

77,683

77,900

77,922

78,269
0.5%

0.8%

2.4%

0.3%

0.0%

5,219,541

5,347,552

5,396,628

5,633,946

1.5%

2.5%

0.9%

4.4%

26,043

26,333

26,507

27,617

1.3%

1.1%

0.7%

4.2%

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

17

Arizona’s Economy

Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs
Prescott MSA (Yavapai County) - Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

97.0

97.4

97.9

97.9

Jan 2016

5.6

5.5

5.4

5.1

61.9

62.7

63.0

62.2

60.9

Private

51.1

51.9

52.1

51.6

50.4

Government

10.8

10.8

10.9

10.6

10.5

Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private ($), BLS

18.85

18.88

19.33

19.97

20.09

Taxable Sales: Total ($000, accrual), ADOR*

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

107

73

79

95

76

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona's "Transaction Privilege Tax," does not include food or gasoline sales.

Prescott MSA (Yavapai County) - Annual Data
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal Income ($000), BEA
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income ($), EBRC**
  % Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

211,247

211,583

213,294

215,357

217,778

0.2%

0.2%

0.8%

1.0%

1.1%

6,345,155

6,591,170

6,811,155

7,172,392

4.4%

3.9%

3.3%

5.3%

30,037

31,152

31,933

33,305

4.2%

3.7%

2.5%

4.3%

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

Sierra Vista - Douglas MSA (Cochise County) Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS
Private
Government
Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private ($), BLS
Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*
Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

50.3

50.0

49.9

49.8

Jan 2016

7.6

7.2

7.0

6.6

34.0

34.1

34.3

34.4

33.4

22.2

22.4

22.5

22.6

21.9

11.8

11.7

11.8

11.8

11.5

20.98

21.97

22.37

21.58

21.76

NA

NA

NA

NA

19.0

11.0

20.0

11.0

17.0

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Sierra Vista - Douglas MSA (Cochise County) Annual Data
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal Income ($000)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income ($)**
  % Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

50,893

50,908

51,269

51,104

50,914

-0.9%

0.0%

0.7%

-0.3%

-0.4%

4,736,361

4,678,914

4,593,193

4,679,941

3.6%

-1.2%

-1.8%

1.9%

36,284

35,785

35,088

36,103

4.3%

-1.4%

-2.0%

2.9%

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

18

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona Economic Indicators - MSAs
Yuma MSA (Yuma County) - Monthly Data
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

92.4

90.8

90.4

89.0

Jan 2016

26.1

23.3

20.1

18.0

52.3

53.6

54.6

55.3

55.0

Private

37.4

38.5

39.5

40.2

40.0

Government

14.9

15.1

15.1

15.1

15.0

20.10

19.83

19.42

19.02

18.11

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

62.0

71.0

54.0

60.0

72.0

Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), BLS

Average Hourly Earnings, Total Private ($), BLS
Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*
Total New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona's "Transaction Privilege Tax," does not include food or gasoline sales.

Yuma MSA (Yuma County) - Annual Data
Population, ADOA*
  % Chg from Year Ago
Total Personal Income ($000)
  % Chg from Year Ago
Per Capita Personal Income ($)**
  % Chg from Year Ago

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

60,522

61,500

63,007

63,718

64,180

0.8%

1.6%

2.5%

1.1%

0.7%

5,622,247

5,586,005

5,838,101

5,841,652

5.6%

-0.6%

4.5%

0.1%

28,051

27,226

27,890

27,553

3.4%

-2.9%

2.4%

-1.2%

*Population counts as of July 1st. ADOA population estimates differ from official Census Bureau estimates. EBRC considers ADOA counts
to be the most accurate.
**BEA total personal income divided by ADOA population estimates.

TABLES: SOURCES AND ABBREVIATIONS
ADHS: Arizona Department of Health Services
ADOA: Arizona Department of Administration, Office of Employment and Population Statistics
ADOR: Arizona Department of Revenue
ADOT: Arizona Department of Transportation
ARMLS: Arizona Regional Multiple Listing Service
ASPB: Arizona State Parks Board
BEA: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce
BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor
Census C-40: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce
Micropolitan SA: Micropolitan Statistical Area must have
at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000, but less than
50,000 inhabitants.

EBR: The Economic and Business Research Center, The University
of Arizona.
MSA: Metropolitan Statistical Area must have at least one core
urbanized area of 50,000 or more inhabitants.
PSHIA: Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport
SAAR: Seasonally adjusted at annual rates
TAR: Tucson Association of Realtors
U.S. Bankruptcy Court: District of Arizona
USCBP: U.S. Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security
BTS: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department of
Transportation
NPS: National Parks Service

* All Aggregate Retail Sales figures reported by EBR include retail, food, restaurant & bars and gasoline sales.
Source: Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona.

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

19

Arizona’s Economy

Arizona Economic Indicators - Counties
Aug 2015

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS

21.3

20.9

20.4

20.3

20.2

Unemployment Rate

13.7

13.2

12.7

12.4

12.6

Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA

18.5

18.4

18.2

18.2

18.1

7.4

7.4

7.4

7.3

7.3

11.1

11.0

10.8

10.8

10.8

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Apache County Summary - Monthly

Private
Government
Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*

*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Gila County (Payson Micropolitan SA) Summary
- Monthly
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

21.4

21.2

21.0

20.8

8.2

8.0

7.8

7.7

15.1

15.0

15.0

14.8

Private

9.9

9.8

9.8

9.8

Government

5.2

5.2

5.2

5.1

NA

NA

NA

NA

Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*

New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40
7
12
10
7
*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Graham County Summary - Monthly
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS

Jan 2016

6

Aug 2015

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

14.7

14.9

15.0

14.8

14.6

Unemployment Rate

7.8

7.7

7.4

7.1

7.0

Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA

8.8

9.0

9.2

9.1

9.0

Private

5.9

5.8

5.8

5.8

5.8

Government

3.0

3.2

3.3

3.3

3.2

Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

NA

Aug 2015

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS

4.1

4.1

4.0

4.0

4.0

Unemployment Rate

8.3

8.5

8.6

8.1

8.1

Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.6

4.6

Private

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

4.0

Government

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

0.6

Greenlee County Summary - Monthly

Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

20

Economic and Business Research Center, Eller College of Management, The University of Arizona

NA

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona Economic Indicators - Counties
La Paz County Summary - Monthly
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA

Aug 2015

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

8.2
8.1
5,075.0

7.7
8.2
5,100.0

7.8
7.6
5,200.0

8.1
7.3
5,250.0

8.3
6.9
5,325.0

Private

2,700.0

2,725.0

2,775.0

2,850.0

2,900.0

Government

2,375.0

2,375.0

2,425.0

2,400.0

2,425.0

Taxable Sales: Total ($000, accrual)
NA
NA
NA
NA
*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Navajo County (Show Low Micropolitan SA)
Summary - Monthly
Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS
Unemployment Rate
Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA
Private
Government
Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

41.4

40.7

40.2

40.3

9.5

9.2

9.0

9.2

28.0

27.8

27.5

27.5

18.3

18.1

17.8

17.7

9.8

9.6

9.7

9.8

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Jan 2016

New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40
14
13
12
9
*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

Sep 2015

Oct 2015

Nov 2015

Dec 2015

Civilian Labor Force (000s), BLS

19.8

19.7

19.7

19.8

Unemployment Rate

14.6

13.6

11.3

10.2

Total Nonfarm Employment (000s), ADOA

Santa Cruz County Summary - Monthly

12.8

13.0

13.4

13.7

Private

9.0

9.3

9.8

10.0

Government

3.8

3.7

3.7

3.7

NA

NA

NA

NA

Taxable Sales: Total ($000s, accrual), ADOR*

7

Jan 2016

New Residential Permits (units), Census C-40
3
6
5
4
*Total of all collection categories covered by Arizona’s “Transaction Privilege Tax,” does not include food or gasoline sales.

ebr.eller.arizona.edu

6

21

April, 2016 Spring Issue

Arizona’s Economy
Economic and business research center
McClelland Hall, Room 103
P.O. Box 210108
1130 E. Helen Street
Tucson, AZ, 85721-0108
George W. Hammond, Ph. D.
Director
(520) 626-1679
ghammond@eller.arizona.edu
Alberta Charney, Ph.D.
Senior Research Economist
(520) 621-2291
acharney@eller.arizona.edu
Alan Hoogasian
Research Economist
(520) 626-6439
ahoogasi@eller.arizona.edu
Daniel Kinnear
Specialist, Business Research
(520) 626-1673
dkinnear@eller.arizona.edu
Pia Montoya
Database Specialist
(520) 621-2523
pmontoya@eller.arizona.edu
Maile L. Nadelhoffer
Research Economist &
Webmaster
(520) 621-4050
mln@eller.arizona.edu
Vera Pavlakovich-Kochi, Ph.D.
Senior Regional Scientist &
Associate Professor of
Geography
(520) 626-0520
vkp@eller.arizona.edu
Heather Peterson
Technical Consultant
(520) 621-4050
thpeterson@comcast.net
Jennifer Pullen
Research Economist
(520) 626-4795
jkanipe@email.arizona.edu
Valorie Rice
Senior Specialist, Business
Information
(520) 621-2109
vrice@eller.arizona.edu

Phone: 520-621-2155
Fax: 520-621-2150
E-mail: ebrpublications@eller.arizona.edu

To subscribe to Arizona’s Economy or other Economic and Business Research Publications, visit:
ebr.eller.arizona.edu/subscribe/
Arizona’s Economy, published quarterly by the Economic and Business Research
Center at the Eller College of Management, is provided as an educational service by
The University of Arizona. Correspondence should be addressed to EBR Publications,
McClelland Hall Room 103, PO Box 210108, Tucson, Arizona 85721-0108.
Arizona’s Economy is available online at: azeconomy.eller.arizona.edu
As part of The University of Arizona’s public mission to improve quality of life for the
people of Arizona and the nation, the Economic and Business Research Center is dedicated
to providing Arizona citizens and decision makers with high quality economic
data and objective forecasts and analyses.
Copyright 2015 by The University of Arizona. Information contained in this publication
may be copied or reprinted with credit to the Eller College of Management at
The University of Arizona.

>> Visit us online at ebr.eller.arizona.edu!

Thank you to our community sponsors for their ongoing support
of Economic and Business Research Center programs.
Arizona Department of Transportation

Elliott D. Pollack and Company

Arizona Joint Legislative Budget Committee

JPMorgan Chase & Co.

Arizona Public Service Company

Maricopa Association of Governments

BBVA Compass

Maricopa County		

CBRE

Pima Association of Governments

City of Mesa

Pima County

City of Phoenix

Salt River Project

City of Tempe

Tucson Electric Power Company

City of Tucson

Special thanks to
for its ongoing support of
the Economic and Business Research Center website!

ebr.eller.arizona.edu